I simply don't understand the need to call these type of efforts "products" like they are a tangible item like an apple or a computer chip.

Reducing to a common denominator, I suppose.

Reducio ad adsurdum.

Someone should send these fools Hayek's "Road to Serfdom". He makes a pretty compelling case that planners tend to screw up any personal liberties we have eventually.

However, its a nice foil for an entire admin to spend all their time guessing what we need in 50 years - Remeber those 1960 plans? Meanwhile, the current town can go to heck and the simps are distracted enough not to notice.

You're not the same Steve who objects to people posting reading assignments by any chance?

Meanwhile, I note that they are worried about "public awareness about PDX and impacted neighborhoods" -- man, I was impacted once after a medicine I took stopped me up and it was awful ... can't imagine a whole neighborhood going through that at once.

I like the part about "meaningful pubilc involvement".
....Like that EVER! happens here...
The planners would just like the public to accept whatever they spoon feed us, no matter how foul it is.

And there's this gem:

The Airport Futures Plan recognizes the importance of PDX to the regional economy by providing the Port with certainty that PDX will be allowed to operate and configure airport facilities in response to changing needs.

In other ords, goodbye, Colwood Golf Course greenspace.

The only involvement that the port cares about is that of the airlines and shipping companies and other businesses that grease the skids with port employees. As for the tax base that supports the port, they don't care and why should they? It's not like they are elected or anything.

As for the tax base that supports the port

Except that the Port does not use taxpayer dollars for the airports, just the maritime operations (Terminals 2, 4, 5 and 6).

I agree, however, PDX is not, and will not, be a major airport along the lines of a JFK, LAX, even SEA or YVR. Alaska and Horizon have really cut back operations at PDX - Alaska Air Group has turned over many former Alaska routes to Horizon so they can use their 737s on more profitable transcon routes out of Seattle and Mexico flights out of LAX (and, it doesn't help that Horizon is having a hard time selling their jets they don't want); Horizon has cut many PDX based flights while moving service out of Seattle and throughout California.

PDX is essentially a Southwest Airlines city now. The other big airlines only fly out of Portland to their nearest hub, with United and Delta offering service to a couple of hubs (and United has a regional hub in Portland to compete with Horizon). Lufthansa and Mexicana left town, and Delta's ex-NWA international flights to Narita and Amsterdam exist only because of subsidies given by the Port. Once those subsidies expire, it's a given those flights will (in the case of Delta to Narita, AGAIN) cease to fly out of Portland, and Portland's "international" status will exist only because of flights to Vancouver and Calgary, and some one-stops (i.e. Alaska PDX-LAX-Mexico, UAL PDX-O'Hare-London).

"You're not the same Steve who objects to people posting reading assignments by any chance?"

I'd be more interested in your opinion/reasoning than someone else's. You can find a book/WEBsite to justify any position you want these days.

I'll maek my one exception with Mr Hayek who seems to be like Nostradamus with these guys though.

I can speak to these issues, having been involved with them for a dozen years. 1. The FAA requires large airports to have a master plan. 2. The City controls land use with a land use plan. Previously, PDX was a "conditional use" in an industrial zone. It was a farce, where the City exercised virtually no control. The new City code prohibits a third runway, a key part of the 2000 plan, which would have devestated local neighborhoods. Just as city code governs development every day throughout the city, this new code is a "product."
Public involvement has been huge and effective. The Planning Advisory Group for the two plans has met for about two years, with another year to go. Many subcomittees have considered the details. The Port's major consultant, with 20+ years experience, says he's never seen anything like it; this is the best product and process he's ever seen. Many skeptics think public involvement doesn't work. I'm here to tell you it can, and it's one reason why Portland is a better place to live than most.

Spoken like a true planner.

For the record, before 1980 I was a planner (not land use), but have done software since. My involvement with the Port and PDX has been entirely as an involved citizen.